Search for: "United States v. State of Minnesota" Results 501 - 520 of 1,828
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Aug 2012, 12:22 am
Ready Pac Foods Inc. is recalling apples shipped to 36 U.S. states for restaurants and grocery stores because of potential contamination from the bacterium Listeria. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 9:05 pm by Dan Flynn
  United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) v. the U.S. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 2:08 pm by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
The basis: the challenge fails to present a substantial federal question, under the precedent set by the United States Supreme Court in Baker v. [read post]
3 Jun 2020, 8:15 am by John Elwood
Texas and United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 6:28 am
But as Target points out, Minnesota has recognized this “separate and distinct” special relationship doctrine, Domagala v. [read post]
5 Oct 2007, 11:58 am
United States, No. 07-359. [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 10:56 am by OxFirst
Pierce, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. [read post]
16 Nov 2013, 7:59 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Alps involved an issue of inequitable conductThis suit was filed by The Ohio Willow Wood Company (“OWW”) against Alps South, LLC (“Alps”) for infringement of United States Patent No. 5,830,237 (the “’237 patent”). [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 12:30 pm by Orin Kerr
Drew, which considered whether Terms of Service violations trigger CFAA liability, and United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 9:26 am by Rick Hasen
Part II will analyze the constitutional issues raised by campaign finance regimes that include contribution limitations affecting recall elections, particularly in light of Citizens United v. [read post]
14 Sep 2011, 10:27 am by Mary L. Dudziak
:Insurrections & Infections: Rethinking the Legal History of Atlanta, 1920-1940 – InmanChair - Robert Baker, Georgia State UniversityPolly Price, Emory University, “Federalization of the Mosquito: Malaria and Public Health In the Southern United States, 1900-1945”Maryan Soliman, University of Pennsylvania, “Racial Equality on Trial in Atlanta during the 1930s”Anders Walker, Saint Louis University, “Scarlett’s Rainbow: Margaret… [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 7:53 pm by Mark Murakami
Interestingly, in justifying why the Supreme Court should review the denial of the injunction, the States assert that this is a common law case of nuisance between several states (Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania) on one hand, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers and "an instrumentality of Illinois" on the other hand. [read post]